Our Ten Favorite Reviews From Siskel, Ebert, Roeper, and “At the Movies”

The best blow-ups, barbs and brawls from "At the Movies," which ends its run as one of America's most important venues for film criticism this weekend.

“The Mask” (1994)

Siskel and Ebert were so good at arguing with each other they didn’t even need to disagree to get into a fight. In this particular case, they both liked “The Mask” and still wound up tussling: Ebert questions Siskel’s “begrudgingly” positive review, and Siskel gets offended that Ebert accuses him of biased criticism. It was never just a discussion about the cinema with those two: it was a war, and the battleground was whatever movie happened to come up at the time. Plus, Siskel’s imitation of Jim Carrey’s overbite is almost as funny as the movie itself. [MS]

“Gladiator” (2000)

After Gene Siskel passed away in 1999, “At the Movies” installed a revolving door of guest critics to fill his chair, with even the most esteemed guests like Newsweek‘s David Ansen and the New York Times’ Janet Maslin keenly aware they were visitors in Ebert’s theater. Filmmakers like Peter Bogdanovich and Martin Scorsese stopped by, slightly more off-the-wall personalities like Harry Knowles and Jeff Greenfield sat in Siskel’s chair, but really the only person willing to take Ebert on head-to-head on his home turf was the little-known Joyce Kulhawik out of Boston, who couldn’t have disagreed more with Ebert’s characterization of Ridley Scott’s swords-and-sandals epic as drab WWE rip-off. Ebert can only sit with his mouth agape as Kulhawik calls “Gladiator” “one of the best movies I’ve ever seen” until frustration gets the best of him and interjects, “Let me talk!” not once but twice. Kulhawik clearly is out of her league once Ebert brings up “Quo Vadis,” but gets points for standing her ground. [SS]

“The Happening” (2008)

Audiences tuned in to “Siskel & Ebert” as much to find out what films were worth seeing as for the unique love-hate chemistry of the men talking about it. Even when the movies weren’t good, Gene and Roger were good television. Though it was a decision that ultimately led to my opportunity to appear on “At the Movies,” I always thought Disney made a mistake by not simply giving Ebert’s chair to his most frequent guest host, The Chicago Tribune‘s Michael Phillips. He and Roeper were one of the few duos who ever managed to capture some of Gene and Roger’s adversarial spark. Watch, for example, their heated review of “The Happening”: Phillips bashes Roeper’s “consistently ‘good’ taste” and Roeper accuses Phillips of critical bias against director M. Night Shyamalan. This clip features that feisty passion that many claim the series lost after Siskel passed away. [MS]

“Full Metal Jacket” (1987)

Even though a clear part of the appeal of “At the Movies” was the possibility of one critic blowing up at the person across the aisle in vehement disagreement, more often than not the best arguments on the show were reasoned, slow burning disputes that would reach a fever pitch about the day’s most provocative films. Ebert once dismissed David Lynch’s “Blue Velvet” as a film “that’s cruelly unfair to its actors” to Siskel’s dismay, while Siskel found Jonathan Demme’s “Silence of the Lambs” “completely lacking in redemptive qualities,” much to Ebert’s chagrin.

But one of the duo’s finest hours came when debating the merits of Stanley Kubrick’s “Full Metal Jacket,” which didn’t impress Ebert, who felt much of the film’s depiction of war felt “recycled.” Siskel didn’t agree, calling it “very original and very close to being a masterpiece” before vigorously recounting his favorite sequence from the film, which Ebert then tries to turn against him. It’s the kind of fierce, substantive debate that no longer seems to exist on television of film or much else, for that matter. [SS]

“Crash” (1996)

Though the widespread use of the “At the Movies” hosts’ names (and thumbs) in movie advertisements made them in the minds of some into a single, two-headed entity, the “ATM” critics, particularly Siskel and Ebert, were very different men with very different taste. Case in point: David Cronenberg’s sex and car accident film “Crash.” Siskel objected to its coldness; Ebert praised it for the exact same reason. Show me another nationally syndicated show that had this level of conversation about the nature of pornography and eroticism on screen and also had a guy miming a woman grabbing her own breasts for sexual purposes. You can’t. That’s what I’ll miss. [MS]

Pages: 1 2